Is Because really Moonlight Sonata Backwards?
The Walrus was Danny
Then YO playing Moonlight Sonata backwards?
Well after all she is "Classically trained"?
Since I don't play the piano, and can read music, sort of...shittily,
is Because actually MS backwards as has been claimed, and could YO
have had the talent to have played it backwards instantly?
Danny
RichL
The tempos are different: 3/4 for MS and 4/4 for Because.
The arpeggio techniques are similar. But the chord sequences are
different, backwards or forwards.
The Walrus was Danny
> The tempos are different: 3/4 for MS and 4/4 for Because.
> The arpeggio techniques are similar. But the chord sequences are
> different, backwards or forwards.
So the story that JL gave is bollocks then?
Danny
BLACKPOOLJIMMY
Yokohu Akbar
<dannyisthewal...@tesco.net> wrote:
> Drink! Feck! Arse! Penis!
> So the story that JL gave is bollocks then?
No more than his assertion that the Stones' "Miss You" was "Bless You"
sped up.
Jeff
wrote:
No..it wasn't supposed to be note for note, Danny. It was supposed to
be the general
idea, if the song was played backwards. That's all.
fatt...@yahoo.com
wrote:
I forget the exact story . . . . did he say Moonlight Sonata or just
mention some classical composer?
fatt...@yahoo.com
Maybe John was saying in his off hand way that he was inspired by
another song played backward. In any event, it is to John's credit
that he wrote such a beautiful song.
The Walrus was Danny
> I forget the exact story . . . . did he say Moonlight Sonata or just
> mention some classical composer?
He said: Yoko was playing Moonlight Sonata on the piano, because she's
like that, she's classically trained, and I said "play it backwards"
and she did, and that's how we got Because.
Now kick me if I'm wrongly, but I think it's from Lennon Remembers.
Danny
Bernie Woodham
wrote:
Snopes has an article on this. The gist is that it wasn't really
backwards, but Because was "inspired" by MS and sort of used it's
chord structure back asswards:
John Gutglueck
Lennon: This morning I wrote this song called Because. Yoko was
playing some classical bit, and I said "Play that backwards," and we
had a tune.
Ono: I was playing Moonlight Sonata, I think, and John said, "It’s
beautiful, beautiful—ah, could we just hear the chords, and could we
play it from this end, and all that, you know, sort of backwards."
I think the answer to Danny’s question depends on what “play
backwards” means in these quotes. If it means playing the *chord
sequence* in reverse order, then the answer is no: Because is not the
Moonlight Sonata backwards. This can be fairly easily demonstrated.
Here are the chords from the verse of Because in their proper
sequence:
C#m - D#o7 - G# - A - C#m - A7(9) - A7add6 – D – Do - [C#m]
[Note: I use –o to indicate a diminished triad, –o7 to indicate a
diminished chord with minor 7th (the so-called half-diminished seventh
chord), and –oo7 to indicate a diminished chord with diminished
seventh (usually called a diminished seventh chord).]
And here are the same chords in reverse sequence:
C#m - Do - D - A7add6 - A7(9) - C#m – A - G# - D#o7 - C#m
If the “backwards chords” claim were true, we would find this reverse
sequence (or at least some significant portion of it) in the C# minor
sections of the Moonlight Sonata’s first movement. We don’t.
Here are the chord sequences of those sections:
Moonlight Sonata mvmt. 1, measures 1-7:
C#m - (C#m7) - A - D - G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - F#m
Moonlight Sonata mvmt. 1, measures 25-44:
F#m - B#oo7 - F#m - G#7 - C#m - D#o - Fxoo7 – G# - G#7(b9) - C#m -
G#7(b9) - C#m - Fxoo7/G# - G#7(b9) - D/G# - F#m/G# - V#7 - A - D#o7 -
G# - G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - F#m
Moonlight Sonata mvmt. 1, measures 48-69:
G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - D - G#7 - C#m - C# - F#m - C# - F#m - C# - F#m
- B7 - E - Amaj7 - D#o7 - G#7 - C#m - D#o7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - G#7 -
C#m - G#7(b9) - C#m - G#7(b9) - C#m
A careful comparison will show that only five of the eight chords
found in the verse of Because (C#m, D#o7, G#, A, and D) are also found
in movement 1 of the Moonlight Sonata. The other three chords (A7,
A7add6, and Do) aren’t heard in the Beethoven piece at all, so finding
the *entire* Because chord sequence reversed in Moonlight is
completely out of the question. What we do find is that there are just
two instances in which a chord sequence from Because is reversed in
Moonlight, and in each of those instances the chord sequence consists
of just two chords: Beethoven’s C#m(7)–A progression in measures 2-3
is (essentially) the reverse of Lennon’s A-C#m progression in the
second phrase of the Because verse. Beethoven’s C#m-D#o7 progression
in measures 58-59 is the reverse of Lennon’s D#o7-C#m progression in
the first phrase of the Because verse.
That’s it. Two very brief and widely separated “reversed chord”
sequences. There’s clearly no extensive chord-by-chord reversal going
on here.
But now consider that, on the day in question (sometime in April,
1969), Yoko Ono was playing the Beethoven piece from sheet music—she
must have been, since she famously admitted in 1970 that she couldn’t
play piano without a score in front of her. And, of course, the score
of the Moonlight Sonata is divided not into chords but into
*measures*. It’s possible, then, that Ono interpreted Lennon’s “Play
that backwards” as “Play those measures in reverse order.” And if we
take Beethoven’s measures (rather than his chords) as our units, we
can see how the first few chords of Because might have been gotten
from measures 40-42 of Moonlight, a pivotal point in the movement’s
development.
[Use the “Fixed font” option to read the following.]
Moonlight Sonata mvmt. 1, measures 40-42:
G#7 A D#o7 G#(7) C#m
|_____||__________||____|
40 41 42
♫listen♫
http://www.box.net/shared/g3mdd1d8gv
Reversing the order of these three measures (and disregarding the
minimal difference between G# and G#7), we get the chord sequence
heard at the beginning of Because:
Because, measures 1-5:
C#m D#o7 G# A
|____||_________|
42 41 |_____|
40
♫listen♫
http://www.box.net/shared/ze7nu33gyo
There you have it. This would account for all the chords in the first
half of the Because verse. So my answer to Danny’s question is a
qualified yes: a substantial portion of Because is, in its harmonic
aspect, virtually identical to a small portion of the Moonlight Sonata
run backwards, measure by measure.
--
John
Bernard
> On Sep 23, 12:47 am, Bernie Woodham <birnhamw...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 19, 7:33 pm, The Walrus was Danny <dannyisthewal...@tesco.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Firstly YO playingmoonlightSonata on piano?
> > > Well after all she is "Classically trained"?
> > > Since I don't play the piano, and can read music, sort of...shittily,
> > > is Because actually MS backwards as has been claimed, and could YO
> > > have had the talent to have played it backwards instantly?
>
> > > Danny
>
> > Snopes has an article on this. The gist is that it wasn't really
> > backwards, but Because was "inspired" by MS and sort of used it's
> > chord structure back asswards:
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/3rzk5x
>
> Lennon: This morning I wrote this song called Because. Yoko was
> playing some classical bit, and I said "Play that backwards," and we
> had a tune.
>
> beautiful, beautiful—ah, could we just hear the chords, and could we
> play it from this end, and all that, you know, sort of backwards."
>
> I think the answer to Danny’s question depends on what “play
> backwards” means in these quotes. If it means playing the *chord
>
> Here are the chords from the verse of Because in their proper
> sequence:
>
> C#m - D#o7 - G# - A - C#m - A7(9) - A7add6 – D – Do - [C#m]
>
> [Note: I use –o to indicate a diminished triad, –o7 to indicate a
> diminished chord with minor 7th (the so-called half-diminished seventh
> chord), and –oo7 to indicate a diminished chord with diminished
> seventh (usually called a diminished seventh chord).]
>
> And here are the same chords in reverse sequence:
>
> C#m - Do - D - A7add6 - A7(9) - C#m – A - G# - D#o7 - C#m
>
> If the “backwards chords” claim were true, we would find this reverse
> sequence (or at least some significant portion of it) in the C# minor
>
> Here are the chord sequences of those sections:
>
>
> C#m - (C#m7) - A - D - G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - F#m
>
>
> F#m - B#oo7 - F#m - G#7 - C#m - D#o - Fxoo7 – G# - G#7(b9) - C#m -
> G#7(b9) - C#m - Fxoo7/G# - G#7(b9) - D/G# - F#m/G# - V#7 - A - D#o7 -
> G# - G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - F#m
>
>
> G#7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - D - G#7 - C#m - C# - F#m - C# - F#m - C# - F#m
> - B7 - E - Amaj7 - D#o7 - G#7 - C#m - D#o7 - C#m - G#7 - C#m - G#7 -
> C#m - G#7(b9) - C#m - G#7(b9) - C#m
>
> A careful comparison will show that only five of the eight chords
> found in the verse of Because (C#m, D#o7, G#, A, and D) are also found
> A7add6, and Do) aren’t heard in the Beethoven piece at all, so finding
> the *entire* Because chord sequence reversed inMoonlightis
> completely out of the question. What we do find is that there are just
> of just two chords: Beethoven’s C#m(7)–A progression in measures 2-3
> is (essentially) the reverse of Lennon’s A-C#m progression in the
> second phrase of the Because verse. Beethoven’s C#m-D#o7 progression
> in measures 58-59 is the reverse of Lennon’s D#o7-C#m progression in
> the first phrase of the Because verse.
>
> That’s it. Two very brief and widely separated “reversed chord”
> sequences. There’s clearly no extensive chord-by-chord reversal going
> on here.
>
> But now consider that, on the day in question (sometime in April,
> 1969), Yoko Ono was playing the Beethoven piece from sheet music—she
> must have been, since she famously admitted in 1970 that she couldn’t
> play piano without a score in front of her.
If Yoko couldn't play piano without written music, then she couldn't
improvise, right? So how did she compose music--the songs on Double
Fantasy, for instance? Did she conceive the songs in her head and
write them out in musical notation before playing them at the piano?
The Arranger
The short answer here is that composition and improvisation are two
very different things. Obviously, good improvisation requires "real
time" fluency, while composition can be painstakingly slow and feature
fits and starts, corrections and emendations.
The Arranger
BlackMonk
"The Arranger" <recu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:80d291c8-7f35-4d14...@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
<The short answer here is that composition and improvisation are two
very different things. Obviously, good improvisation requires "real
time" fluency, while composition can be painstakingly slow and feature
fits and starts, corrections and emendations. >
I'd say that it would pretty much have to. The alternative is someone
sitting down at his instrument and producing a fully realized song, words
and music, in real time. I can't imagine that happening very often.
Bernard
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don’t see the two things as generically different. Laborious
composition at the keyboard is a halting sort of improvisation
(creating the “unforeseen”), and fluid improvisation at the keyboard
is facile sort of composition (a “putting together” of musical
elements). If Yoko really did require a written score to play piano,
then she couldn’t do either. She wouldn’t have been able to just sit
down at the keyboard and work out the chords to a new song with her
ears and fingers the way her husband could with his.
Bernard
> "The Arranger" <recur...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Classical composers like Bach, Beethoven, and Lizst are said to have
improvised instrumental pieces that sounded as fully developed as
their polished compositions. And don’t jazz pianists like Keith
Jarrett do something similar?
As for music with words, there’s that episode of Extras where David
Bowie sits down at the piano in a nightclub and spontaneously creates
a song about the Ricky Gervais character.
The Arranger
> On Oct 28, 11:55 pm, "BlackMonk" <BlackM...@email.msn.com> wrote:
>
> > "The Arranger" <recur...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:80d291c8-7f35-4d14...@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> > <The short answer here is that composition and improvisation are two
> > very different things. Obviously, good improvisation requires "real
> > time" fluency, while composition can be painstakingly slow and feature
> > fits and starts, corrections and emendations. >
>
> > I'd say that it would pretty much have to. The alternative is someone
> > sitting down at his instrument and producing a fully realized song, words
> > and music, in real time. I can't imagine that happening very often.
>
> Classical composers like Bach, Beethoven, and Lizst are said to have
> improvised instrumental pieces that sounded as fully developed as
> their polished compositions. And don’t jazz pianists like Keith
> Jarrett do something similar?
Sure. Being a composer doesn't rule out being able to improvise
fleuntly. But neither does it require it.
> As for music with words, there’s that episode of Extras where David
> Bowie sits down at the piano in a nightclub and spontaneously creates
> a song about the Ricky Gervais character.
Yes, but was this actually improvised or pre-scripted? Legend has it
that "Splish Splash" came from a Bobby Darin nightclub act where he
asked audience members to give him a line abnd he would improvise a
song around it. Of course, that story could be typical PR bull.
The Arranger
Bernard
>
> - Show quoted text -
Oh, I was joking about Bowie. That song was carefully pre-arranged,
with Bowie writing the music and Gervais the lyrics. Hilarious scene!
The Walrus was Danny
> qualified yes: a substantial portion of Because is, in its harmonic
> aspect, virtually identical to a small portion of the Moonlight Sonata
> run backwards, measure by measure.
A well considered and researched response John! Hats off!
Danny
The Walrus was Danny
> Fantasy, for instance? Did she conceive the songs in her head and
She must have been like Mozart, or Beethoven, or Bizet or
somebody....after all she'd just as talented eh?
Danny
Fattush
BlackMonk
"Bernard" <bernard...@live.com> wrote in message
news:ff61fbc6-09d7-4f01...@q35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On Oct 28, 11:55 pm, "BlackMonk" <BlackM...@email.msn.com> wrote:
> "The Arranger" <recur...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:80d291c8-7f35-4d14...@o4g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>
> <The short answer here is that composition and improvisation are two
> very different things. Obviously, good improvisation requires "real
> time" fluency, while composition can be painstakingly slow and feature
> fits and starts, corrections and emendations. >
>
> I'd say that it would pretty much have to. The alternative is someone
> sitting down at his instrument and producing a fully realized song, words
> and music, in real time. I can't imagine that happening very often.
< Classical composers like Bach, Beethoven, and Lizst are said to have
improvised instrumental pieces that sounded as fully developed as
their polished compositions. And don’t jazz pianists like Keith
Jarrett do something similar? >
Got any recordings of those Bach, Beethoven and Lizst compositions?
Otherwise, I'd guess that's a combination of myth and over-enthusiastic
audiences.
As for Jazz musicians, they generally improvise over a pre-existing form.
That's something very different.
F Parella
wrote:
Didn't George Martin play the keyboard part? Maybe Yoko, in her
infinite talent, and her ability to play famous classical pieces
forward and backward, taught him.
F Parella
Yeah, that's what I've been wondering. When I hear "Kiss Kiss Kiss"
or "I'm Your Angel," I wonder how Yoko came up with those mind-blowing
keyboard parts. Most people get distracted from Yoko's instrumental
talents by her inimitable vocals. But there can be no doubt, the
woman is a virtuoso pianist. Her extensive classical background is
fully in evidence on those incredible pieces. I wish people would get
past their sexism and racism and see Yoko for the incredible musician
she is.
"Kiss, kiss, kiss, kiss me love..."
Me
> Yeah, that's what I've been wondering. When I hear "Kiss Kiss Kiss"
> or "I'm Your Angel," I wonder how Yoko came up with those mind-blowing
> keyboard parts. Most people get distracted from Yoko's instrumental
> talents by her inimitable vocals. But there can be no doubt, the
> woman is a virtuoso pianist. Her extensive classical background is
> fully in evidence on those incredible pieces. I wish people would get
> past their sexism and racism and see Yoko for the incredible musician
> she is.
>
> - Show quoted text -
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Don't forget that she's an incredible vocalist too. Sgt. Pepper is her
best album.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA